The New Fat Scotland 'Thanks for all the Fish' Thread.

baldelectrician

Generali wrote: »

Good luck with that!!!:D

It is better to wait.

As I have said previously, I think the next referendum will be 2021-2022

The stars have to align and the following things need to fall into place

• An SNP majority in 2016 at Holyrood
• A SNP / YES majority in 2021 at Holyrood
• A SNP majority on local councils in 2017 ( some councils had a ban on Yes literature in many areas on street furniture for example)
• The better together previous option of deliberately having nobody available to attend a debate in a school / college (so it would have to be cancelled) may be amended to one representative from each side. This will ensure fair and balanced debate rather than NO debate. This may include an option of an empty chair being filled by a teacher / lecturer playing devils advocate for the missing side.
• Labour may still to be in turmoil and lose UK GE in 2020
• A new PM of a unlovable (for Scots) kind, ie Boris or Theresa May / Gove after 2020.
• Another few years of young Yes voting Scots reaching 16-one of my local wholesalers is a fervent NO voter and conceded that both his sons are YES supporters. Time will tell and there are 1.5 yes voters coming up for every no voter that passes away above 70- for example - by 2020 there will be 5 people eligible to vote in a referendum, I know 4 out of these 5 are definite YES as things stand and the 5th (my daughter) will listen to her brothers over me and probably be YES.
• The smith commission will be up for renewal just after 2021 and the deal will likely be less favourable to Scotland next time round
• The oil will still be low but Scotland's on-shore economy will have easily made up the loss in oil revenue by then, so oil will be less of an issue
• The Scottish Government will have set up it's own Social Security and Inland Revenue systems by then (as required by the new powers), so more accurate figures of income from Scotland will be available - this will take much of the argument around the GERS data inaccuracies.
• I speak to a lot of people (I am out and about in houses every day) and there are a fair number of NO voters that have changed their mind (and some that are able to be persuaded to); I hear almost nobody that has went from Yes to No after the referendum

Shakethedisease

Generali wrote: »

Well Scottish people told You Gov why they voted as they did in the referendum and only 10% of them voted Yes to keep out a Tory Government and the myth that it is the old that prevented independence was shown to be rubbish too as only the younger-middle aged voted for independence, under 25s and over 39s voted strongly to remain in the Union.

The fiscal case which the Yes campaign found so effective has been smashed on the rocks of a low oil price and the Conservatives, far from being the enemy within, are seeing their share of voting intention increasing faster than any other major party in Scotland. Presumably because they have been managing the British economy very effectively.

Everyone that is going to vote voted in the last referendum so there's no additional support coming from getting the vote out so really you're hoping that there is an appetite for going through the entire referendum campaign again only with a worse-faring economy and somehow getting a different result.

Good luck with that!!!:D

If the Tories had been 10 points in front of Labour in July/August 2104 imo, Yes would've gotten over the line. Many Labour voters thought Miliband would be in power rather than voting to keep the Conservatives out. It was taken as read.

Any future referendum will have no Labour party to make the running. It'll have to be the Conservatives.

It was both the economic case ( currency etc ), and the political case ( Labour would get back in anyway ) that swung things last time. Next time should there be another referendum there will be no political case put forward whatsoever unless Labour look likely for No 10. The economic case will be framed entirely in terms of who's in the best position to look after a Scottish economy for good or for bad. I doubt many will think the Conservatives will have the edge there.

The unionist case has put all it's eggs in one basket called GERS and oil. And doesn't it show !

Shakethedisease

baldelectrician wrote: »

It is better to wait.

As I have said previously, I think the next referendum will be 2021-2022

The stars have to align and the following things need to fall into place

• An SNP majority in 2016 at Holyrood
• A SNP / YES majority in 2021 at Holyrood
• A SNP majority on local councils in 2017 ( some councils had a ban on Yes literature in many areas on street furniture for example)
• The better together previous option of deliberately having nobody available to attend a debate in a school / college (so it would have to be cancelled) may be amended to one representative from each side. This will ensure fair and balanced debate rather than NO debate. This may include an option of an empty chair being filled by a teacher / lecturer playing devils advocate for the missing side.
• Labour may still to be in turmoil and lose UK GE in 2020
• A new PM of a unlovable (for Scots) kind, ie Boris or Theresa May / Gove after 2020.
• Another few years of young Yes voting Scots reaching 16-one of my local wholesalers is a fervent NO voter and conceded that both his sons are YES supporters. Time will tell and there are 1.5 yes voters coming up for every no voter that passes away above 70- for example - by 2020 there will be 5 people eligible to vote in a referendum, I know 4 out of these 5 are definite YES as things stand and the 5th (my daughter) will listen to her brothers over me and probably be YES.
• The smith commission will be up for renewal just after 2021 and the deal will likely be less favourable to Scotland next time round
• The oil will still be low but Scotland's on-shore economy will have easily made up the loss in oil revenue by then, so oil will be less of an issue
• The Scottish Government will have set up it's own Social Security and Inland Revenue systems by then (as required by the new powers), so more accurate figures of income from Scotland will be available - this will take much of the argument around the GERS data inaccuracies.
• I speak to a lot of people (I am out and about in houses every day) and there are a fair number of NO voters that have changed their mind (and some that are able to be persuaded to); I hear almost nobody that has went from Yes to No after the referendum

I agree. Not off the back of this EU referendum. Best to wait a while. Labour's collapse has been such that young people cannot see any reason to vote for them. And even pensioners are on the turn. There's only so many times in five years one can be told 24/7 that one's country is a complete crap fest ( like Generali for example does, but on a much larger scale )... before people get more than a little antsy to change the situation and look for a route out.

A Conservative Govt in 2020 is definitely not it.

HAMISH_MCTAVISH

Shakethedisease wrote: »

The unionist case has put all it's eggs in one basket called GERS and oil. And doesn't it show !

Hmmm - it's sorta an important basket though.

Without the finances to pay for your political dreams they rapidly become undeliverable nightmares.

HAMISH_MCTAVISH

Shakethedisease wrote: »

There's only so many times in five years one can be told 24/7 that one's country is a complete crap fest before people get more than a little antsy to change the situation and look for a route out.

The fact is that an indy Scotland can certainly survive.

But we'd have to spend a hell of a lot less and/or tax a hell of a lot more. Just like many other countries do.

Now you may not mind the prospect of having to pay £9 for a pint like happens in some other nations - or to pay 50% of your income in tax - but most Scots don't want that.

HAMISH_MCTAVISH

And it's not just GERS - Here's the figures from the OECD.



The problem, as has been pointed out many times, was not really the income side of things for tax revenue - that's not all that much lower than the UK - well, at least it wasn't before the oil crash...

The big problem is the spending side. Which is much, much higher.

Scotland spends like a drunken sailor on shore leave - free prescriptions, free Uni, free eye checks, reversing spare room subsidies - etc etc etc - not to mention the most bloated public sector and quango expenditure in the UK with more Execs of those earning over £150K than in Oil & Gas, Banks and Insurance combined!!!

Shakethedisease

HAMISH_MCTAVISH wrote: »

And it's not just GERS - Here's the figures from the OECD.



The problem, as has been pointed out many times, was not really the income side of things for tax revenue - that's not all that much lower than the UK - well, at least it wasn't before the oil crash...

The big problem is the spending side. Which is much, much higher.

Scotland spends like a drunken sailor on shore leave - free prescriptions, free Uni, free eye checks, reversing spare room subsidies - etc etc etc - not to mention the most bloated public sector and quango expenditure in the UK with more Execs of those earning over £150K than in Oil & Gas, Banks and Insurance combined!!!

I've seen it passed round. Looking at the top 5 or 6 countries on it.. this is the absolute worst advert for staying in the Union I've seen in quite some time.

If ever there was an argument for a complete change in governance, the above graph is it. Appalling statistics when one thinks of the potential Scotland had/has.

Shakethedisease

HAMISH_MCTAVISH wrote: »

The fact is that an indy Scotland can certainly survive.

But we'd have to spend a hell of a lot less and/or tax a hell of a lot more. Just like many other countries do.

Now you may not mind the prospect of having to pay £9 for a pint like happens in some other nations - or to pay 50% of your income in tax - but most Scots don't want that.

I think that it's getting to the point Hamish that people just don't want things to stay as they are. Politically certainly, it's getting harder and harder to justify Westminster as the Scottish Govt features more and more heavily in people's day to day lives and finances. The fact that in a year or so it will be Revenue Scotland for income taxes and a Scottish Welfare system set up, is just another example of gradualism in play.

Yes, income and most welfare devolution will expose Nicola Sturgeon's government to sometimes harsh and unforgiving headwinds. But much more importantly, it will gradually acclimatise our political culture to talking about tax and spend decisions much more seriously, on a peculiarly Scottish economic scale.

Comparisons with England and Wales are likely to continue. But given sufficient time to percolate and mature -- this has the potentially radically to revise the status quo, building greater fiscal capacity in our politicians, and among the wider public of electors.

http://lallandspeatworrier.blogspot.co.uk/2016/03/just-as-planned.html

The economic case is yet to be made clearly I agree. But your graph above is terrible in terms of what Scotland has become under Westminster's governance. Personally, I feel that the unionist side of the debate has jumped the shark over the last year or so. Gone too far with the doom scenario's. Because it's starting to bite Westminster on the bum now, rather than the intended target of the Scottish Govt. Who have historically controlled very little, nor are in anyway to blame for the dire figures presented on that graph.

Generali

Shakethedisease wrote: »

I think that it's getting to the point Hamish that people just don't want things to stay as they are. Politically certainly, it's getting harder and harder to justify Westminster as the Scottish Govt features more and more heavily in people's day to day lives and finances. The fact that in a year or so it will be Revenue Scotland for income taxes and a Scottish Welfare system set up, is just another example of gradualism in play.

And there is absolutely no evidence to show that more people want Scotland to become a country.

CLAPTON

Shakethedisease wrote: »

I think that it's getting to the point Hamish that people just don't want things to stay as they are. Politically certainly, it's getting harder and harder to justify Westminster as the Scottish Govt features more and more heavily in people's day to day lives and finances. The fact that in a year or so it will be Revenue Scotland for income taxes and a Scottish Welfare system set up, is just another example of gradualism in play.

http://lallandspeatworrier.blogspot.co.uk/2016/03/just-as-planned.html

The economic case is yet to be made clearly I agree. But your graph above is terrible in terms of what Scotland has become under Westminster's governance. Personally, I feel that the unionist side of the debate has jumped the shark over the last year or so. Gone too far with the doom scenario's. Because it's starting to bite Westminster on the bum now, rather than the intended target of the Scottish Govt. Who have historically controlled very little, nor are in anyway to blame for the dire figures presented on that graph.

it's just so disappointing

another damaging Tory budget
by now I was sure that the polls would be showing 65-70% in favour of iscotland.
I guess the benefit junkies just can't leave go of mummy's apron strings.

when will be ever have a fairer, more equal society where a person from Yorkshire gets the same benefits as the person from scotland

whatever is happening?